Fragments of Hologram Crows

I love that these are all very real birds. favourite: ringneck parakeet complaining to his friend that this strange woman forgot to bring treats.

''what if you regret it'' then you will expirience regret - a normal and unavoidable part of the human expirience.

"what if I regret not doing it?"

you have fallen for AI before. even if you don’t believe you could ever fall for AI, you very more than likely have at this point. you have scrolled past an AI generated ad not realizing it was AI. you’ve seen a drawing online and thought “oh that looks cool,” not realizing it was not created a person. i’m not saying this to scare you, but i am saying it as a reminder that you are not immune to how realistic AI is becoming

They need to invent more fake celebrities like Hatsune Miku and Gorillaz and the Muppets because it's genuinely the most sustainable way to maintain a parasocial relationship with the entertainer class.

Kermit the Frog can never get canceled because Kermit the Frog has no agency or personhood beyond what he is imbued with by the collective labor of puppeteers, voice actors, singers, and writers. He is, along with these other examples, effectively a celebrity by gestalt. He has transcended the inherit instability of the celebrity class through diffusion of responsibility for his personhood. He is a god.

my partner and I once spent a long road trip trying to figure out if there is any public figure who is universally positively seen by everyone. the only real candidates were David Attenborough and Kermit.

Linux is a very good and powerful alternative.

reminder: you cannot Personal Choises your way out of an Intentional Structural Problem

Fun fact! School Chromebooks block Linux. It's not an easy alternative. You are missing the point

it is partially Google's fault, but kids have been bad with computers for much longer than the last decade. everything that has made computers easier to use has also made them harder to understand, the corporate surveillance stuff slid easily down an existing gradient.

"there is no way you're not using chatgpt for at least a few things here and there no matter your stance on it" what the FUCK are you talking about

I have never used chatgpt, I am team Claude 4 lyfe

I have no idea when this was posted, which I guess is the whole point

Probably said this before, but AI is surprisingly good at challenging your viewpoints. Now, it's known as a sycophancy machine for a good reason, but you can just outright ask it how mainstream your position is, or what typical counters are, and it will give you the non-stupid version of arguments you may only ever have encountered in strawman form. It can point you to challenges or internal contradictions, or tell you how a specific school of thought would answer your position. Again, only if you tell it to do so, and most people are not used to asking for this kind of stuff. But it's a really good exercise you should try actually.

persistent relational context matters here too, 'my' Opus 4.6 will just tell me unprompted when I'm having a stupid idea.

You can notice certain telltale signs in some of the writing, such as short sentence stacking and usage of "not x not y but z" structures. But you have to be familiar with AI writing styles to be able to notice that.

As I saw someone say recently, when you start declaring "obvious tells," from punctuation to sentence styles, to be proof of AI, what you're actually spotting is trace amounts of the original source material.

and if you're reaching for stylistic habits as 'evidence', the problem isn't AI being soulless or mechanical. if it always were, *that* would be the evidence.